|
#7
| |||
| |||
| After trying this both ways in the past few months, I can wholeheartedly agree that having auto-balancing turned off is the best way to go. I definitely do not get a warm and fuzzy feeling with it on, nor could I see how to intercede when auto-balancing mysteriously did not or could not balance, (consequently, unless you pay close attention, you can continue on for months with an unbalanced account). Message to Microsoft: It would be great if you could get this to work, it would be even better if you could get Money to tell you the details why it couldn't auto- balance, and it would be the 'creme de la creme' of all features good and useful if you could combine the two preceding requests and make them work together. - quote - > -----Original Message----- > Retired Coal Miner <...[at]...> wrote: > > So, I'm curious if the knowledgable regulars on here (1) trust auto > > balancing?, and (2) what do they do when auto balancing doesn't work - do > > they keep on going for months without ever balancing there accounts? > From someone who is definitely a "Regular" ("knowledgable" is a judgement > call :-) > 1. No, absolutely not. Tried it for a while, and it seemed to work OK, > but I just don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling from it :-) So I switched > back to using paper statements to balance against when I get them. > Equally important - because this is where I ran into trouble with > auto-balancing turned on - is to not allow "automatically accept > downloaded transactions". It's just too easy for Money to mismatch the > transactions. > I like downloading the transactions, so that I can tell which things have > cleared my bank (if auto-balancing is turned off, Money will mark the > transactions that are downloaded and accepted with a "E". This also makes > balancing to the paper statement a matter of a minute or 2, because they > "E" transactions get auto-checked when you balance. Most of the time, I'm > balanced to $0 difference as soon as I start the balancing process. > Cheers, > Steve > . |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| Retired Coal Miner <...[at]...> wrote: - quote - > So, I'm curious if the knowledgable regulars on here (1) trust auto
From someone who is definitely a "Regular" ("knowledgable" is a judgement> balancing?, and (2) what do they do when auto balancing doesn't work - do > they keep on going for months without ever balancing there accounts? call :-) 1. No, absolutely not. Tried it for a while, and it seemed to work OK, but I just don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling from it :-) So I switched back to using paper statements to balance against when I get them. Equally important - because this is where I ran into trouble with auto-balancing turned on - is to not allow "automatically accept downloaded transactions". It's just too easy for Money to mismatch the transactions. I like downloading the transactions, so that I can tell which things have cleared my bank (if auto-balancing is turned off, Money will mark the transactions that are downloaded and accepted with a "E". This also makes balancing to the paper statement a matter of a minute or 2, because they "E" transactions get auto-checked when you balance. Most of the time, I'm balanced to $0 difference as soon as I start the balancing process. Cheers, Steve |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| I had to look up that term, just to be sure, (Luddite: someone who can’t or doesn’t want to use modern technology). So, I'll take this to mean you don't enable auto balancing. But, if you did enable auto balancing, and your statement didn't balance, how would you balance it? I'm going to be bugged and tormented until I find a definitive answer to this: either M03's designers intended you to go months without your account(s) balancing (jeez, ... no wonder people turn to Luddism), or there's a more user friendly way to do this that I haven't figured out yet - - (than un-reconciling transactions). If it's the latter, could it be more user unfriendly? On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:18:13 +0100, Bob Peel, MVP <Bob_Peel[at]kiandra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: - quote - > I am a Luddite - like you. I keep a rigorous track of all "ins" and > "outs" > in Money; I check my Bank's version of events on their web-site every day > and once a month spend a minute or so reconciling vs the paper statement. > No hassles about how the bank spelt a payee this month and as I say only > takes a minute or two. > -- Regards > Bob Peel, > Microsoft MVP - Money |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| I am a Luddite - like you. I keep a rigorous track of all "ins" and "outs" in Money; I check my Bank's version of events on their web-site every day and once a month spend a minute or so reconciling vs the paper statement. No hassles about how the bank spelt a payee this month and as I say only takes a minute or two. -- Regards Bob Peel, Microsoft MVP - Money Hints/Tips http://support.microsoft.com/default...d=fh;EN-GB;mny UK Wishes/Suggestions mnyukwsh[at]microsoft.com "Retired Coal Miner" <...[at]...> wrote in message news pruhr34buzwep9u[at]news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...- quote - > After doing some research, and reading up the issues on banking technology > websites, such as bankersonline.com, I am not keen on trusting > electronically delivered info from a bank vs. paper statements. It all > boils down to this: banking regulations dictate that paper statements be > accurate, whereas regulations governing electronically delivered info are > not as strict, or don't exist at all. > Don't get me wrong, I do like opening Money up every few days and seeing > which transactions have cleared my bank, -- it's an excellent feature and a > great convenience. But I'd draw the like at that. > So, I'm curious if the knowledgable regulars on here (1) trust auto > balancing?, and (2) what do they do when auto balancing doesn't work - do > they keep on going for months without ever balancing there accounts? > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 06:51:58 -0500, Jim Johnson <jamesone[at]cableone.net> wrote: > > Well it's clear we disagree, but I do think the bank will stand behind > > the > > data it post, but to each his own. I don't know of any way other than > > unreconciling items that you've already download etc. Maybe some of the > > regulars here will have some suggestions. Take care. > > > Jim > > > "Milburn Drysdale" <.> wrote in message > > news prueuc5kd5j38ra[at]news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...> > > I don't believe that is how it is supposed to work. > > > > > For one reason, the paper statement is the only statement banks stand > > > behind as being accurate, (refer to the typical agreement for online > > > services, electronically delivered info isn't guaranteed to be accurate) > > > , > > > another reason is if there's an issue with a downloaded transaction, a > > bank > > > can tell you to wait until the statement closes to see what's wrong. > > > > > More importantly, there's also another problem with the 'downloading is > > > supposed to eliminate the need to balance' theory: What do you do when, > > > say, your account did not auto balance for the last two or three months, > > > you have effectively gone two or three months with the account not being > > > balanced? > > > > > My experience has been that the first time auto balance didn't work, it > > > will never 'self correct' on subsequent statement closure periods. And > > > even if it did, you'd go a month or two or three until it did balanced. > > > > > So, back to the original issue, if auto balancing didn't work, how do > > > you > > > balance against a paper statement without doing an inherently counter- > > > intuitive thing like un-reconciling some transactions? > > > > > > > > |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| After doing some research, and reading up the issues on banking technology websites, such as bankersonline.com, I am not keen on trusting electronically delivered info from a bank vs. paper statements. It all boils down to this: banking regulations dictate that paper statements be accurate, whereas regulations governing electronically delivered info are not as strict, or don't exist at all. Don't get me wrong, I do like opening Money up every few days and seeing which transactions have cleared my bank, -- it's an excellent feature and a great convenience. But I'd draw the like at that. So, I'm curious if the knowledgable regulars on here (1) trust auto balancing?, and (2) what do they do when auto balancing doesn't work - do they keep on going for months without ever balancing there accounts? On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 06:51:58 -0500, Jim Johnson <jamesone[at]cableone.netwrote: - quote - > Well it's clear we disagree, but I do think the bank will stand behind > the > data it post, but to each his own. I don't know of any way other than > unreconciling items that you've already download etc. Maybe some of the > regulars here will have some suggestions. Take care. > Jim > "Milburn Drysdale" <.> wrote in message > news prueuc5kd5j38ra[at]news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...> > I don't believe that is how it is supposed to work. > > > For one reason, the paper statement is the only statement banks stand > > behind as being accurate, (refer to the typical agreement for online > > services, electronically delivered info isn't guaranteed to be accurate) > > , > > another reason is if there's an issue with a downloaded transaction, a > bank > > can tell you to wait until the statement closes to see what's wrong. > > > More importantly, there's also another problem with the 'downloading is > > supposed to eliminate the need to balance' theory: What do you do when, > > say, your account did not auto balance for the last two or three months, > > you have effectively gone two or three months with the account not being > > balanced? > > > My experience has been that the first time auto balance didn't work, it > > will never 'self correct' on subsequent statement closure periods. And > > even if it did, you'd go a month or two or three until it did balanced. > > > So, back to the original issue, if auto balancing didn't work, how do > > you > > balance against a paper statement without doing an inherently counter- > > intuitive thing like un-reconciling some transactions? > > > > |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Milburn Drysdale <.> wrote: - quote - > I don't believe that is how it is supposed to work.
Whether it is "supposed to work" that way or not, it does. But be that asit may .... I had used the automatic stuff for a while, then turned them off so I could start balancing against the monthly statement (it isn't actually paper either, I download an Acrobat file). Turn off both "Automatically accept all downloaded transactions from banking statements" and "Automatically mark accepted transactions as Reconciled". The 1st is really dangerous - you're trusting Money to match transactions. At least 1 in 10 of my transactions would get mismatched that way - I have to look at them and manually match those 1 in 10 transactions. The 2nd will return you to being able to balance against paper statements. I, like you, *want* to balance against the monthly statement, myself. Now, when Money downloads transactions from your bank, and you accept them, they will instead be marked with an "E" (basically, consider this to mean "cleared"). Once you've turned those off, then wait for your *next* paper statement. You need to be at a point that the transactions that already got marked reconciled by the automatic method have actually cleared and appear on your statement. Then, when you balance it, do *not* adjust the opening balance. Use what Money says is there, because it's working with what it already has reconciled, and that last balance when it was automatically marking. It *won't* match the opening balance shown on the paper statement. Put in the right stuff for ending balance and date, and then you should be able to reconcile successfully. Normally, one won't have to do anything at that point, assuming your download was current. Usually, the transactions that are on my statement are already "check-marked" (Money seems to automatically check-mark all of the "cleared" transactions up to the date of the statement, or something like that). At most, I wind up clicking one or 2 transactions, and I'm balanced. It can be strange getting it done the 1st time, if you've been using "automatically reconcile" in the past, but after the 1st time, it usually becomes quick, and easy. |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
| Well it's clear we disagree, but I do think the bank will stand behind the data it post, but to each his own. I don't know of any way other than unreconciling items that you've already download etc. Maybe some of the regulars here will have some suggestions. Take care. Jim "Milburn Drysdale" <.> wrote in message news prueuc5kd5j38ra[at]news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...- quote - > I don't believe that is how it is supposed to work. > For one reason, the paper statement is the only statement banks stand > behind as being accurate, (refer to the typical agreement for online > services, electronically delivered info isn't guaranteed to be accurate), > another reason is if there's an issue with a downloaded transaction, a bank > can tell you to wait until the statement closes to see what's wrong. > More importantly, there's also another problem with the 'downloading is > supposed to eliminate the need to balance' theory: What do you do when, > say, your account did not auto balance for the last two or three months, > you have effectively gone two or three months with the account not being > balanced? > My experience has been that the first time auto balance didn't work, it > will never 'self correct' on subsequent statement closure periods. And > even if it did, you'd go a month or two or three until it did balanced. > So, back to the original issue, if auto balancing didn't work, how do you > balance against a paper statement without doing an inherently counter- > intuitive thing like un-reconciling some transactions? > On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 01:31:46 -0500, Jim Johnson <jamesone[at]cableone.net> wrote: > > I think you are missing the whole point. Downloading from your bank and > > using the auto balance feature is suppose to eliminate the need to > > balance > > from the paper statement. Even if you get the was unable to balance your > > account message when you download (I get that to sometimes), if you > > change > > your view to unreconciled and look at the today's balance on the left at > > the > > bottom of the register, and add you unreconciled transactions to it (not > > post dated ones) it will or should match the banks reported balance shown > > on > > the left after the download and your in perfect sync with the bank > > > Jim |
| | |||
| |||
| I don't believe that is how it is supposed to work. For one reason, the paper statement is the only statement banks stand behind as being accurate, (refer to the typical agreement for online services, electronically delivered info isn't guaranteed to be accurate), another reason is if there's an issue with a downloaded transaction, a bank can tell you to wait until the statement closes to see what's wrong. More importantly, there's also another problem with the 'downloading is supposed to eliminate the need to balance' theory: What do you do when, say, your account did not auto balance for the last two or three months, you have effectively gone two or three months with the account not being balanced? My experience has been that the first time auto balance didn't work, it will never 'self correct' on subsequent statement closure periods. And even if it did, you'd go a month or two or three until it did balanced. So, back to the original issue, if auto balancing didn't work, how do you balance against a paper statement without doing an inherently counter- intuitive thing like un-reconciling some transactions? On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 01:31:46 -0500, Jim Johnson <jamesone[at]cableone.netwrote: - quote - > I think you are missing the whole point. Downloading from your bank and > using the auto balance feature is suppose to eliminate the need to > balance > from the paper statement. Even if you get the was unable to balance your > account message when you download (I get that to sometimes), if you > change > your view to unreconciled and look at the today's balance on the left at > the > bottom of the register, and add you unreconciled transactions to it (not > post dated ones) it will or should match the banks reported balance shown > on > the left after the download and your in perfect sync with the bank > Jim |
|
#-1
| |||
| |||
| I think you are missing the whole point. Downloading from your bank and using the auto balance feature is suppose to eliminate the need to balance from the paper statement. Even if you get the was unable to balance your account message when you download (I get that to sometimes), if you change your view to unreconciled and look at the today's balance on the left at the bottom of the register, and add you unreconciled transactions to it (not post dated ones) it will or should match the banks reported balance shown on the left after the download and your in perfect sync with the bank Jim "Milburn Drysdale" <.> wrote in message news prud4vzac5j38ra[at]news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...- quote - > Can anyone explain how this is supposed to work: > In M03, if you have auto balance enabled ('Automatically mark accepted > transactions as reconciled (R)' seems to turn this on), but your account > doesn't auto balance by itself, how are you supposed to balance the account > when you get the paper statement? > I am talking about a normal bank checking account here. When you receive > your paper statement, the usual method of clicking 'Balance this Account' > won't work because you will have transactions beyond the close date of the > paper statement already reconciled, thus causing the ending balance M03 > calculates and the ending balance on the paper statement to differ. No > matter what you do in the 'Balance this account' series of dialogs, the > numbers will never match up. > The only way I can see to do this is to un-reconcile the transactions dated > past the closing date of the paper statement, which of course defeats the > purpose of marking the transactions as reconciled as they come in. |
| Tags |
| auto, balance, issue, monthly, paper, statement |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | Last Post | |
| The Ending Balance from a reconciled statement does not carry over Bruce: I've used Money 98, then Money 2002 for the past four years without problems until several months ago. In March my statement balanced perfectly.... | Microsoft Money | 6 | 07-16-2003 11:04 PM | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |